REP12138

• Permit No: C1996083
• IBM Index Class Name: Report
• Doc Date: 3/2/2007
• Doc Name: 2005 AHR Adequacy Response
• From: J.E. Stover & Associates Inc
• To: DRMs
• Annual Report Year: 2005
• Permit Index Doc Type: Hydrology Report
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

J. E. STOVER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
P.O. BOX 60340
GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81506
PHONE: [phone], FAX [phone]
MINE ENGINEERING
MINE RECLAMATION
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONST. MANAGEMENT
February 28, 2007
Mr. J. J. Dudash
Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety
1313 Sherman Street, Room 215
Denver, CO 80203
Re: Bowie No. 2 Mine, Bowie Resources LLC
2005 Annual Report
'- "--Adequacy Response-- `~°- -
Permit No. C-1996-083
~~=,~'~IVED
MAR 0 2 2007
tedamation,
,. and Safety
Dear Mr. Dudash:
The DMG's letter dated February 20, 2006 transmitted its adequacy comments regarding the 2005 Annual
Report. Following are Bowie's responses to the DRMS' comments and concerns:
2005 Annual Hvdrologv Report (AHR)
The footnote on Figure 32 for the Terror Creek spring 18 states that the point has not been
influenced by mining. However, examination of Map 9, Hydrologic Monitoring Location
Map, shows that mining has occurred under spring 18. Also, the report figures for the
other springs in the immediate area, springs S-16, S-4 and S-4A, have footnotes that state
they have been influenced by mining. Please explain why the 2005 hydrologic monitoring
of spring S-18 should not be operational, rather than baseline.
BRL -Map 9, Hydrologic Monitoring Location Map, shows the 5 year mine plan, not the
actual up-to-date mine map. Upon review of the current mine map, Spring 5-18 has not
been influenced by mining and therefore monitoring data continues to be baseline.
2. Chlorine is included in the surface water list 2 on page T2-1 of the 2005 AHR. However,
chlorine was not sampled, nor is it mentioned in the surface water list 2 on page 2.05-85 of
the permit application. Please revise list 2 in future AHRs to exclude sampling for chlorine.
BRL - Page T2-1 of Table 2 has been revised for future AHRS excluding chlorine from
surface water list 2.
The vast majority of sampling requirements was followed. However, there are several field
sampling omissions involving wells DH-676, DH-67D, DH-67abv, DH-67b1w, TC-03-01
East, TC-03-01 Upper B and TC-03-03. These omissions occurred even though full suite
analyses were performed. Please explain.
BRL -The BRL contractor who was responsible for monitoring these wells either didn't
sample for these.parameters or didn't write them down at time of sampling. Anew
contractor was hired to take over the monitoring of these wells at the beginning of 2006,
and this problem has been corrected.